Search This Blog

Section 306 IPC- found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC and were, accordingly, acquitted of the said offences. The appeal against the first respondent-accused No.1 is abated as died.= What is abetment is defined under Section 107 of Indian Penal Code. To constitute the offence of abetment under Section 107 IPC., there must be an intentional aiding or conspiracy or instigation by the accused for doing of a thing. All the material witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. As such, Ex.P-9-dying declaration of the deceased only remains on record. There cannot be any dispute that once the dying declaration is found to be true, correct and trustworthy and it is not an outcome of tutoring, the law is well settled that it can be acted upon. A conviction can be based solely on the dying declaration. A statement given by a person either verbal or written given by a person as to the cause of his death or any one of the circumstances resulting in his death, is admissible in evidence when the cause of death of such person comes in question, per Section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In Ex.P-9-dying declaration the deceased stated one word that due to the harassment of A-3, she committed suicide. But, she did not state as to the nature of harassment of A-3. She survived for about one month after the incident.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

Criminal Appeal (SR) No.12741 of 2008

JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Appeal under Section 378 (3) and (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment, dated 18.01.2007, passed in S.C.No.37 of 2003 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Asifabad, whereunder and whereby the respondents-accused were found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC and were, accordingly, acquitted of the said offences. The appeal against the first respondent-accused No.1 is abated as died.

2. The brief facts of the case that are necessary for disposal of this Criminal Appeal may be stated as under: -

A-3 is the husband of the deceased. On 12.03.2002 at about 11 am., while the deceased was alone in house, in the absence of P.W-1 and A-3, she poured kerosene and set fire to herself. On seeing the same, one of the witnesses rushed to the spot and took her to the hospital of one Dr.Madhu. Thereafter, for better treatment, she was shifted to ESIHospital, where she was admitted for more than one month and was later discharged. On 16.04.2002, she died due to the unhealed injuries. On receipt of the information from the hospital, the Police registered a case on the complaint of P.W-1, investigated into the same and filed the charge sheet.

3. In order to substantiate the case, on behalf of the prosecution P.Ws.1 to 11 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P.10 were marked. On behalf of the accused, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

4. P.W-8-doctor who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased opined that the deceased died as a result of septicemia due to secondary infection of the burn injuries.

Therefore, the death of the deceased is unnatural.

In that event,

the prosecution has to establish that due to the abetment of the accused, the deceased committed suicide.

What is abetment is defined under Section 107 of Indian Penal Code.

To constitute the offence of abetment under Section 107 IPC.,

there must be an intentional aiding or conspiracy or instigation by the accused for doing of a thing.

All the material witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution.

As such,

Ex.P-9-dying declaration of the deceased only remains on record.

There cannot be any dispute that once the dying declaration is found to be true, correct and trustworthy and it is not an outcome of tutoring, the law is well settled that it can be acted upon. A conviction can be based solely on the dying declaration.

A statement given by a person either verbal or written given by a person as to the cause of his death or any one of the circumstances resulting in his death, is admissible in evidence when the cause of death of such person comes in question,per Section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

In Ex.P-9-dying declaration the deceased stated one word that due to the harassment of A-3, she committed suicide.

But, she did not state as to the nature of harassment of A-3.

She survived for about one month after the incident.

Because of lack of money the parents of the deceased could not take the deceased to a better hospital for further treatment.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the death of the deceased was only due to the harassment of A-2 and A-3.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court does not find any grounds to set aside the impugned judgment.

The Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Chandra Kumar Appeal Suit No.144 of 2012 Dated 9th August, 2012Judgment: The appellant filed this appeal challenging Order, dated27-01-2012, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, in CFR.No.90 of 2012, refusing to register the suit filed by him on the ground that the same is barred by limitation . The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance basing on agreement of sale, dated 13-11-2008. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement of sale, the balance amount of Rs.4 lakhs out of the total sale price of Rs.9 lakhs was to be paid within two months from the date of expiry of the limitation of the said agreement of sale. The case of the appellant is that though he had been requesting the respondent to receive the balance sale consideration and register the sale deed in his favour, the respondent did not come forward; that therefore, he got issued a legal notice to the respondent on12-10-2011; that the respondent acknowled…

Or.18, rule 17 and sec.151 C.P.C - petition filed for reopen and examination of the executant of Ex.A1 the sale deed to fill up the lacuna in evidence pointed out at the time of arguments not maintainable =in VadirajNaggappa Vernekar (deceased by L.Rs) v. Sharad Chand Prabhakar Gogate (supra), it is held as follows: "17. It is now well settled that the power to recall any witness underOrder 18 Rule 17 CPC can be exercised by the Court either on its own motion oron an application filed by any of the parties to the suit, but as indicatedhereinabove, such power is to be invoked not to fill up the lacunae in theevidence of the witness which has already been recorded but to clear anyambiguity that may have arisen during the course of his examination. Of course,if the evidence on re-examination of a witness has a bearing on the ultimatedecision of the suit, it is always within the discretion of the Trial Court topermit recall of such a witness for re-examination-in-chief with permis…

The 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.101 of 2011 in the Court of III
Additional District Judge, Tirupati against the appellants and respondents 2 to
5 herein, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule
property, a hotel at Srikalahasti, Chittoor District. He pleaded that the land
on which the hotel was constructed was owned by the appellants and respondents 2
and 3, and his wife by name Saroja, and all of them gave the property on lease
to M/s. Swarna Restaurant Private Limited, 4th respondent herein, under a
document …